The stack hat doesn’t stack up

Australia, and Sydney most of all, is embarrassingly behind in the ballooning global bike-share stakes.

Yet we cannot pin the entire blame on our nanny-state obsession with compulsory helmets or knee-jerk partisan opposition to cycle paths that may get in the way of our beloved cars.

These are the trees that hide the woods, excuses for our inability to embrace reforms that could transform our capitals into far more liveable, enjoyable and authentically modern metropolises. And all through the ingenious public-private partnerships that have funded the schemes in standard-bearers such as Paris, London and now New York.

Australia’s much vaunted world-class cities are worse than third-world when it comes to innovation in urban transport. Instead of bringing back the trams and instituting clever bike and car-sharing programs that really catch on, we are in gridlock, and not only while sitting in traffic jams from Perth to Adelaide and Sydney.

One factor bogging us down is the interminable insistence on obligatory helmets – yet studies show bike safety is best protected by other measures, with health benefits outweighing potential risks by 20 to 1.

Or as Macquarie University professor in finance and actuarial studies Piet de Jong told the New York Times : “Statistically, if we wear helmets for cycling, maybe we should wear helmets when we climb ladders or get into a bath, because there are lots more injuries during those activities."

Legislative and political inflexibility means Melbourne’s bike-share scheme has had a less than impressive take-up. The daunting head gear obstacle blocks enthusiasts pushing for Sydney to get on its collective bike.

Tories taking the lead

Related Quotes

Company Profile

At the same time, cities such as Paris are powering ahead with integrated city transport options. The city’s government is adding vast, energy-efficient tramway systems that ring the centre, connecting suburban areas and building the sprawling car-sharing scheme called the Autolib on the same model as the brilliant, inexpensive, private-sector-backed Vélib bicycle-sharing marvel.

A quick trip to the French capital, London and now New York hammers home the reality that forward-looking, globally interconnected metropolises are embracing alternative transport.

Cities are being shared by pedestrians, cyclists and those who only want to use cars when necessary, instead of being ruled exclusively by those behind the wheel of a vehicle. Traffic and pollution improves, as does overall health and wellbeing.

The charismatic leaders doing the grunt work are not all left-wing greenies. Following the lead of Paris’s visionary outgoing mayor,
Bertrand Delanoë
, father of the Vélib scheme, cycling enthusiast and London Mayor
Boris Johnson
installed “Boris bikes" – official title, Barclays Cycle Hire.

New York, under its billionaire mayor, the Republican-turned-independent
Michael Bloomberg
, has this month embraced a collective bicycle scheme called Citi Bike. The program is sponsored by Citibank and is spreading across Manhattan and Brooklyn. Significantly, Bloomberg has resisted pushes to legislate for compulsory helmets, though riders are encouraged to protect themselves.

There have been some predictable “Nimby" protests from West Village millionaires and restaurant owners, cross that the new docking stations will sully the look of their prime real estate or chic nosheries. In gentrifying once hard-scrabble working-class neighbourhoods of Brooklyn, some locals are protesting against what they see as white yuppies arriving and the rent and price hikes they bring.

But 70 per cent of New Yorkers are in favour of the program, according to surveys. This is in large part thanks to the crusading Bloomberg’s leadership.

Over several years, he has installed successive bike lanes and made the entire city more friendly and therefore safer for riders and pedestrians. So why is Australia – notably Sydney – creative and innovative on so many fronts but lacking in long-term vision on urban planning and transport? It is not as if Australians lack knowledge that could inspire us to think big-picture about how we move around our congested urban areas.

New York City’s senior bureaucrat in charge of the Built Environment and Healthy Housing program,
Karen Le
e, recently came to NSW. Lee explained how the new bike-sharing and other ‘‘mixed streets’’ reforms – sharing roads between pedestrians, buses and cyclists as well as cars – had pushed bike use up by 239 per cent, with long-term health benefits.

The issue is indeed complicated by Australia’s draconian helmet laws. No one wants to share a helmet, and having to carry one in case you want to hire a bike for an hour won’t work. The solution is a new legal framework leaving riders with the ultimate choice, and a cross-party political will driven by widespread public support.

Disappointingly, cycling has been too politicised in Sydney. With Lord Mayor Clover Moore being a lightning rod for all that the conservatives hate, bike paths have automatically and unfortunately fallen into that category.

Still, over in London, it is true-blue Tory BoJo who is spending millions, with Barclays help, on his treasured bike-share system. Amazingly, these bike schemes are flourishing in northern hemisphere cities with often miserable, cold climates. Imagine how pleasurable it would be to ride most places in Australian cities, blessed as they are with sunshine and generally milder weather.

There is a way to make this work so the private sector stumps up for plenty of the costs. The lowest-cost model for riders is the Paris Vélib, where the taxpayer paid very little for the program start-up. Income from Paris’s lucrative bus shelter advertising is offered in return to JCDecaux, the firm that underwrites the scheme. Bloomberg, whose scheme is more expensive for bikers, has done sponsorship deals with Citibank.

France may have its intractable economic problems, but it could teach Australia much about urban transport. If we consider ourselves world class, bike sharing and the transport transformations it entails are frontiers Australia must breach.